Will new nutrition labels lead to healthier consumers?

The FDA is set to impose major changes to nutrition labels on food packages for the first time in over 20 years. The organization sites the need to bring labels up to speed with the contemporary American diet as a catalyst for the change. New labels are meant to be easier to understand and will be based on expanded portion sizes. Added sugars are in the center of the change with new labels making the distinction between natural and manufactured sugar additives. Many in the FDA and other nutritionists explain that the expensive change is necessary in the fight against obesity in the US. Even First Lady Michelle Obama praised the initiative and promoted the changes at the anniversary celebration for her “Let’s Move” campaign aimed at reducing obesity.

Consumers have a right to know what they are putting into their body. However, some new label requirements could force food and beverage companies to put nutritional information both good and bad on the front of their packaging. Could this potentially impact the branding and packaging of these products? What about products high in added sugar? Does this change damage their brand? What impact will these changes have on the way consumers view food and beverage products? 

CVS snuffs tobacco companies

Earlier this month, CVS announced they will no longer carry tobacco products in their stores. This decision comes at a great cost for the company. Accounting for 3% of the company’s total profit, CVS brings in $2 billion annually from the sale of tobacco products. According to CVS CEO Larry J. Merlo, eliminating tobacco from their stores is in line with the company’s purpose of helping customers on their path to better health. But is this move to better brand image worth the cost? Sure CVS is a pioneer and is demonstrating that the company is on a righteous mission to promote the fact that they care about their customers’ health but they are doing this at the expense of 3% of their annual revenue. Do you think this move will help to strengthen the brand and ultimately increase sales enough to cover the lost revenue?  Do you think this strategy is sustainable? What other benefits or costs do you see could come out of this move? Do you think other companies will follow suit? What does this mean for tobacco sales? Is it ethical to cut out a certain product completely or could this be seen as discrimination?

Part of a nutritious breakfast?

A few years ago I posted about Nutella’s deceptive ads claiming the spread was a healthy addition to a nutritious breakfast. After a class action settlement, Ferrero, the makers of Nutella, agreed to change their messaging in advertisements, on the label and on their website. However, it seems that Nutella is still trying to promote a healthy image for the brand. A food blogger has examined what is in Nutella and has discovered that the spread is far from healthy....but Nutella's website and other brand messaging still implies that it is healthy. Did Nutella change their advertising message enough? Should there be a warning on the label saying that it contains a high amount of sugar? How do you feel about marketing foods that are known to be unhealthy? Do you think there should be more or less regulation?